From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2eaa323f38c88c36 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) Subject: Re: with System still required for address clauses ? Date: 1998/08/25 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 384656714 Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news) X-Nntp-Posting-Host: houdini.camb.inmet.com References: <35E2E9D3.73566873@elca-matrix.ch> Organization: Intermetrics, Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-08-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Mats Weber (Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch) wrote: : if I have an address clause : for X'Address use ; : do I still need a with clause for System (provided, of course, that I can : write without visibility on System), as was required in Ada 83, or : was this dropped in Ada 95 ? The Ada 83 rule stating this is in RM83 13.5(3). No, you no longer need a "with" clause on System. An implicit semantic dependence is created on package System, even if you don't have an explicit "with" clause for it. This is a general rule for attribute references which have types not declared in package Standard. See RM95 10.1.1(26). -- -Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com http://www.inmet.com/~stt/ Intermetrics, Inc. Burlington, MA USA